« The Middle Game | Main | OMG »

December 02, 2009

Huh

Go figure:

I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart. I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves. I am not without faults and I am far short of perfect. I am dealing with my behavior and personal failings behind closed doors with my family.

Poor guy. Understandable, though. I guess he was "tired of her sh**".

Posted by Cassandra at December 2, 2009 12:11 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3417

Comments

If she spends all of her time all larded-up like that and dripping with beef tallow, no wonder he went for drier pastures.

Posted by: Boquisucio at December 2, 2009 12:56 PM

Not to worry, Boq.

We women do that sort of thing solely for other women. It's just how we are.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 12:59 PM

Understandable, though. I guess he was "tired of her sh**".

Maybe I'm missing the sarcasm tags or something, but you do realize that old joke is meant as a warning, not an excuse.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 01:31 PM

Well, you're right - I don't get it. Must be one of those guy things :p

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 02:04 PM

We women do that sort of thing solely for other women.

No sh...uh...kiddin'? Can I watch?

I'll make the egg salad and be right over! :-o

Posted by: JHD at December 2, 2009 02:39 PM

This is an awfully drippy apology for someone who whose only mistake was to drive over a fire hydrant. [sarcasm not cluelessness intended]

Posted by: I Call BS at December 2, 2009 02:50 PM

Understandable, though. I guess he was "tired of her sh**".

huh? did she wanna defec8 on him?

Posted by: I Call BS at December 2, 2009 02:51 PM

This is an awfully drippy apology for someone who whose only mistake was to drive over a fire hydrant.

Yes, but it was a reeeeeeeeally BIG fire hydrant :p

Seriously, if she hit him with a golf club (and I haven't read anything even approaching proof - much less evidence - that she did that) then obviously that's not kosher. But I find all the hand wringing over poor, "battered" Tiger a bit odd.

If my spouse cheated on me, I certainly wouldn't hit him. But I'd move out so fast it would make his head spin. I count it as one of the great blessings of my life that I'm fairly certain he wouldn't do something like that, though I suppose one can never know.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 02:56 PM

I'll make the egg salad and be right over! :-o

Now that's what my so-called life has been missing these days... a good egg salad joke! :)

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 02:58 PM

Now that's what my so-called life has been missing these days... a good egg salad joke!

HEY! You brought up the whole Mazola thing first. And we all know you can't have a good Mazola party without egg salad! ;-)

though I suppose one can never know

Yeah right! You'd know before he did. You womyns have that feminine all-sensing ability you know. Always in our heads. If I ever fooled around on TLB then I might just as well prostrate myself before the masses 'cause she'd sure as hell know I did.

Unless she writes me a note then that'd be different! :-o

Posted by: JHD at December 2, 2009 03:15 PM

I sense another 'sex and relationships' post...

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 03:20 PM

Noooooooo! Not another gender issues post! I'll almost certainly write something that offends you, and then you'll stop blogging again for a while. Don't go, Shane!

As to Lion Forest's wife, I have to agree with that general in Dr. Strangelove: I fear she means to drain me of my vital manly essences.

Posted by: a former european at December 2, 2009 03:27 PM

I fear she means to drain me of my vital manly essences.

Don't be afraid, little former European ... it's OK - everybody does it!

Posted by: I Call BS at December 2, 2009 03:47 PM

This whole thing is so far in the not-reality celebrity stratosphere that I've having a very hard time caring one way or the other.

Posted by: Cousin Dave at December 2, 2009 04:09 PM

Well, you're right - I don't get it. Must be one of those guy things :p

Well, I think the sentiment of the joke would be Cass Approved: No amount of hawtness trumps a bad personality, so if you're smart you'll value the latter over the former.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 04:12 PM

I guess I'm confused, here.

Do we know she has a "bad personality"? Not saying she doesn't. But oddly the one thing I read about her suggests otherwise.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 04:19 PM

Perhaps it helps to realize the target of the joke isn't Tiger nor his wife, but rather the guys (you see several of them in QandO's comment thread) who say she's so hot they'd put up with anything.

Sorry guys, you say that, but no, you won't.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 04:36 PM

I figure that if he had an affair she told him, "that negates our pre-nup." That's why he crashed.

Posted by: Allen at December 2, 2009 04:59 PM

"Maybe I'm missing the sarcasm tags or something, but you do realize that old joke is meant as a warning, not an excuse."

As long as that warning goes both ways . . .

Posted by: Little Miss Attila at December 2, 2009 05:37 PM

Oh, it absolutely does. You don't typically hear the reverse formulation,(my guess is that women tend not to need reminding of it* as they are less visually oriented to start with) but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.


*Though the stupid Twilight craze might suggests otherwise: Girls, the guy isn't a reformed bad-boy. He's a f*&%ing 100 years old with a thing for insecure teenage girls, he may not be a blood sucking murderer, but what he *is* is a M-FING PEDOPHILE!

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 06:10 PM

Perhaps it helps to realize the target of the joke isn't Tiger nor his wife, but rather the guys (you see several of them in QandO's comment thread) who say she's so hot they'd put up with anything.

If that's it, then no - without your saying something I would never in a million years have put that construction on it, Yu-Ain.

What I thought when I read that, was: "He cheated b/c he was tired of her BS".

IOW, we'd all do the same thing if we could (wink wink, nudge nudge). I took it literally.

It's hard for anyone to step outside of their own frame of reference. To me, it is so obviously messed up to cheat on the mother of your children with multiple bimbos that I can't wrap my mind around it.

I can wrap my mind around being tempted. All of us are tempted from time to time.

I just can't wrap my mind around putting everything at risk that way. Then again, she didn't leave him so maybe he wasn't really risking everything.

And perhaps my reaction was influenced by other completely head exploding things I've read this week. I try so hard to be balanced and fair when I'm looking at male/female issues. I totally get that men and women don't always think alike.

But still, I can't get away from my conviction that there is such a thing as right and wrong. And all too often I see conservatives wink at wrongs committed by men and go hermitile over wrongs committed by women. Liberals err in the opposite direction. Neither strikes me as rational.

One standard. I don't give a crap how subjectively "hard" it is for either men or women to do the right thing. We know what it is.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 06:13 PM

At least we've been spared another public tear-filled apology for, inter alia, "disappointing my fans" while the scorned little woman stands resolute behind her wayward man at the podium. I'd rather he just say "Screw off. It's none of your damned business." I'm sure that Tiger would still be able to pick up some spending money playing skins at the local public course after his wife cleans him out and his sponsors drop him in favor of "The Next Tiger." At least he'd still have his pride - which, if you think about it, is punishment enough seeing as that what got him into this pickle in the first place.

Sure can hit the long ball, though.

Posted by: spd rdr at December 2, 2009 06:37 PM

If that's it, then no - without your saying something I would never in a million years have put that construction on it, Yu-Ain.

That's kinda what I had figured. Sometimes there's an unspoken backstory that we just assume everyone knows about.

Typically, that line is thrown out in 2 situations:

1) "How could he be so stupid to cheat/divorce/ leave, *her*, she so hawt?" The underlying assumption behind that statement is that hawtness trumps everything. This is blatently not true. But unfortunately, some guys don't learn that lesson until it's already too late.

Which often leads to...

2) "My GF/SO is so hawt, but damn if she don't get annoying". Well, dude, it's your own friggin fault, you're the one who chose looks over personality. You got what you asked for so don't come crying to me about it.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 06:53 PM

I'd rather he just say "Screw off. It's none of your damned business."

Couldn't agree more. He went up in my estimation (slightly) for having the dignity to say, "Back off - this is a private matter".

I don't give a rat's ass about his pride. He should have thought about that before putting himself - and his wife - in a position where they'd be held up to ridicule and public curiosity.

I'd like to believe that he just got lost in the cycle of mindless celebrity worship and started believing his own BS. But in the end, he didn't promise me anything.

He promised his wife. And I'd like to believe, because I try to extend the benefit of the doubt, that he is stiff arming the press to protect his wife and mitigate the damage his idiocy subjected her to.

If so, good on him.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 2, 2009 06:57 PM

I'd like to believe that he just got lost in the cycle of mindless celebrity worship and started believing his own BS.

So what? He lost the most precious thing between a man and woman; trust. Without trust you ain't got squat. I spent an entire life trying to keep myself out of situations where there MIGHT even be an APPEARANCE of inpropriety. Not for any pat on the back man stuff either. Simply because I love my wife and it would rip me to shreds for her to lose trust in me.

And I don't give a fig how "famous" a person is. Temptations come to us all. It's human nature. A person knows inside the difference between right and wrong. Once the trust is gone you can never get it back!

Posted by: JHD at December 2, 2009 08:38 PM

Do we know she has a "bad personality"?

I'd venture to guess that any woman who takes a swing at her hubby with a golf club* (assuming that he's not physically assaulting her and she's trying to defend herself) has a bad personality.

* or other potentially deadly weapon

Posted by: I Call BS at December 2, 2009 08:45 PM

To my knowledge there is absolutely no evidence other than irony/poetic justice that she did such a thing.

In retrospect the use of "bad personality" was ill chosen. The formulation that the joke is aimed at isn't that the women necessarily has a bad personality, but rather that the woman's personality simply doesn't matter.

She could be an angel or Satan incarnate but she's *hot* so therefor her personality is irrelevant.

Notice the comments in the linked post. Many of the guys aren't saying "She seems like a nice lady, if Tiger doesn't want her, I'll take her off his hands." They are saying, "Damn she's gorgeous. If Tiger doesn't want her, I'll take her." Never once do they discuss her character. It simply doesn't matter.

But as they eventually learn, (unfortunately, probably the hard way) that Yes, it really does.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 2, 2009 10:34 PM

I stopped reading the comments over there, when I followed the link earlier today. All I could think was "I'd want nothing to do with men like this". Those kinds of comments - going on about her looks only - are the kinds of things that give men, as a group, a bad reputation. They prove the statement "Men are pigs", and I really don't want to believe that.

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at December 2, 2009 11:36 PM

Tiger Woods was in a car accident?

Gee, it's funny that we get the news over here that the HadCRU crew got caught inventing AGW out of whole cloth, HopenChangen is unraveling like a cheap scarf because Denmark is the center of a billion dollar Euro Carbon Trade scam, and the Iranian army is massing for "maneuvers" just north of us on the border -- but we missed out on an earth-shattering event like *that*...

Posted by: BillT at December 3, 2009 02:52 AM

I'd venture to guess that any woman who takes a swing at her hubby with a golf club* (assuming that he's not physically assaulting her and she's trying to defend herself) has a bad personality.

I have not read a single bit of evidence that she swung at him. Not one. On the other hand there seems to be a fair amount of evidence that he cheated on her, not once but several times.

Of course I'm *sure* a guy who cheats on his wife always wears a condom to protect the mother of his children against catching some STD. Because not doing so would be... oh, I don't know... reckless and irresponsible?

She could be an angel or Satan incarnate but she's *hot* so therefor her personality is irrelevant.

It's funny. A while back I read something really depressing. It was an article about how men are happier in their marriages when they marry a smart woman or some such nonsense. The depressing part was the cited comments from several happily married men. One in particular stood out, though it was just an exaggerated form of the others. The guy said, in effect, "My wife is really, really smart. I never even noticed her intelligence until we had been married for a few years."

[thud]

re: the comments. I took most of them as just kidding around. Guys do that all the time online any time a woman's picture is shown (and that is impossible to avoid online these days). It was the 'tired of her sh**' thing that seemed bizarre to me, though if Yu-Ain is correct then I just didn't get the joke. Either way, I wasn't offended.

It just struck me as bizarre so I turned it into a joke :p

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 06:11 AM

With my experience - or should I say, lack thereof, "jokes" like that are lost on me...

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at December 3, 2009 08:43 AM

Well, I've got a slightly different take on this. I don't judge her guilty of "bad personality" if she DID take a swing at him with a nine iron. From what I understand, she swung at the car, but either way, no difference. Why? Because he cheated on her. I'm not saying he deserves the death penalty for it, but an a** whuppin? Yeah, probably. And no, it doesn't matter if she looks like the Creature from the Black Lagoon, if he made a promise to love, honor and cherish, forsaking all others, yeah... he's got a few deserved lumps coming. I mean hell, they have KIDS. I think the kids should get a swing or two as well.

As for the "why would he cheat on her", poor character seems the most likely culprit. Looks are no guarantee of fidelity if your spouse has low character. She's a very attractive woman, sure. But if she marries a man with the lack of self respect sufficient to make his vow meaningless, she's going to be cheated on. So this really isn't about her, it's about him.

Let me close with this... I don't really care a rat's patoot what goes on in their private life. Public figure or no, it's really none of my concern. But part of it became my (and the public's) concern when he refused to talk to police. PR considerations NEVER are more important than legal considerations, and the fact they're going to let him get away with it makes me angry. But I think I might give him a pass IF what I suspect happened did happen. My current suspicion is they got into it when he fessed up to his infidelity. She goes a bit nuts and scratches/slaps him. He leaves (one point for him, deescalation is really his best move) but she follows him and starts whacking on his Caddy with his best nine iron (again, excessive, but I give her points for ironic choice of weapon). He crashes and now the cops get involved. He then lies about why his face is messed up and the broken out windows to protect her.

If all that is true, then I can give him an ethical pass for making small atonement and trying to protect his wife. Not full atonement, but partial. I actually do hope that's what went down, but it's really not my business.

Posted by: MikeD at December 3, 2009 09:07 AM

Miss Ladybug:

I wouldn't take it too much to heart.

There are a million things men and women don't understand about each other and that lack of understanding is only compounded when you're staring at a comment box instead of listening to someone's voice and seeing the expressions on their face that would provide so much more context than a bunch of disassociated pixels ever can.

It's dangerous to take comments literally, though when I don't understand something my default response is to choose the literal meaning rather than to project my own interpretation onto someone I've never met. The truth is that communication is imprecise even in person. On the Internet it's a thousand times more so.

That's why I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and hope they'll return the courtesy.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 09:35 AM

They prove the statement "Men are pigs", and I really don't want to believe that.

How's that workin' out for ya'? ;-)

You pretty much summed it up Mike. Nicely done! In today's anything goes society the guys that believe in vows, oaths, family, et al are simply not counted. If you're not all sensitive male getting in touch with your feminine side apologetic then you simply do not count. Problem is there are more of us then there are them. Believe it or not! Still. To this day. Heh!

Posted by: JHD at December 3, 2009 09:44 AM

my default response is to choose the literal meaning

Exactly!

Typical woman. :-o

Posted by: JHD at December 3, 2009 09:46 AM

And this is what I think is funny about men.

On the one hand, they are always saying that men and women are different. OK, I agree. Men also tell women that men are (supposedly) dirt simple: what they said is what they meant and women should stop reading all sorts of things into what men say - IOW, we should not overthink.

OK. To me, that says, 'When in doubt, don't read anything into what I said. Instead, focus on what I actually said, rather than what you think I may have meant by it.

But when women do that, we are accused of:

- taking men too seriously, or
- (and this one kills me) being over-emotional. Because, you know, taking a giant step back from your feelings and assuming someone meant what they said is "emotional". OK. Got it.

The problem, in my humble view, is that men often don't express themselves terribly well. They also say a lot of things that, when they're asked for clarification, it turns out are completely unrepresentative of what they really think. The phrase, "I didn't mean it" comes to mind :p

Umm... ok. Which leaves me with the thought that no matter how we react - we're screwed :p We're supposed to magically understand people who don't share our experiences and outlook on life... all without applying "illogical" feminine intuition.

This, we're given to understand, is "logical". Which we'd understand if we were only logical and rational at all times, the way men are :p

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 10:08 AM

This, we're given to understand, is "logical". Which we'd understand if we were only logical and rational at all times, the way men are :p

ROTFLMAO!

Summed it up nicely Cassie. I especially like this part: Which leaves me with the thought that no matter how we react - we're screwed :p yee-haw! So true. So true!

The problem is you are equating thought to men. It's better to simply "be" and live with it. We truly are capable of not having a single thought in our heads at times. I know it is totally mystifying to you and impossible for you to understand but there you have it! :-o

Yeah, and the whole feminine double entendre thing just adds fuel to the fire. "Does my butt look fat in these jeans?" "Which shoes go better with this dress?" "How does my hair look?"
etc. etc., etc., etc. that's just axing for trouble.

Of course the correct honest answer to all of the above is "You'd look better naked holding a beer" but then we'd be castrated and stuck on a pike! ;-)

Posted by: JHD at December 3, 2009 10:49 AM

Ladies, You want to know what were thinking? Alright, I'll tell you.

We're thinking: "I like a beer, and I'd like to see something nekkid."

Posted by: Jeff Foxworthy at December 3, 2009 10:59 AM

Of course the correct honest answer to all of the above is "You'd look better naked holding a beer"

Actually that answer would both amuse and please me. It doesn't, however, answer the question (given that I assume most men would rather their SO not prance about in public nekkid and holding a beer). :p

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 11:06 AM

We truly are capable of not having a single thought in our heads at times.

There are virtues to that. However, you are right. I do not understand it at all.

I have often wished I could turn my mind off.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 11:21 AM

It doesn't, however, answer the question (given that I assume most men would rather their SO not prance about in public nekkid and holding a beer). :p

Who said anything about "in public"?

I have often wished I could turn my mind off.

God bless you ladies, I don't know how you do it. The strain of being on ALL the time would drive me batty.

Posted by: MikeD at December 3, 2009 11:41 AM

It doesn't, however, answer the question

Of course it doesn't, that's why it's the correct answer. :-)

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 3, 2009 11:47 AM

Boy, do I miss baseball.

Posted by: spd rdr at December 3, 2009 12:03 PM

"maybe he was tired of her sh**". This argument smacks of the old one-way street, where men could use as a defense "she deserved it" or "she wanted it". It smacks of hostility and annoyance and, while no one knows what goes on in any relationship, it seems like your argument isn't about the violation of marital obligations or commitments, but that the woman couldn't keep her man.

Posted by: Barbara at December 3, 2009 01:24 PM

Barbara,
You might want to read the prior comments as that's actually the point Cass was trying to make.

She read, as you did, the trope as making excuses for bad behavior after being in the relationship rather than as a warning to not get into a relationship just for looks to start with.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 3, 2009 02:37 PM

My confusion, Yu-Ain, and Barbara's, is that neither one of us understands what warning a man not to be fooled by good looks has to do with a man cheating on his wife?

It only seems to make sense if you assume that Tiger Woods cheated b/c all his wife had to offer was her looks. Maybe that's true, but so far I haven't seen much evidence that she is at fault here.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 02:46 PM

...on the other hand, I've seen (both here and at QandO) an awful lot of people assuming that she did something wrong (failed to put out, was a bitch, hit him with a golf club, was selfish/spoiled).

Of course there is absolutely zero evidence for any of this. But hey, we all know how those hot women are. Every last one of them.

Whatever.

And then there's Tiger Woods, who has all but admitted he was fooling around. Several women have also said he was sleeping with them, and not just once. One has released an answering machine message where (supposedly) he asks her to remove her name from her machine b/c his wife 'went through his phone' - a not unreasonable thing to do if you think your husband is cheating though it's kind of distasteful to think about). Also several 3rd parties have said they saw him hitting on women in bars "all the time".

So Tiger, while we have no absolute proof he cheated, is not exactly looking like a prince here. No one piece of circumstantial evidence is dispositive, but when you add them all up it doesn't look so good.

OTOH, what has anyone said she did? Beside commit the crime of being beautiful?

Oh. Right. We don't need evidence b/c we all know that beautiful women are spoiled, high maintenance bitches.

It seems as though quite a few people are blaming her for being cheated on, simply b/c she's pretty. I find this *extra* amusing since the first thing men say any time a woman dares to criticize another women is: "Oh, she's just jealous."

*rolling eyes*

Posted by: Cassandra at December 3, 2009 03:21 PM

Oh, I never said that your reading wasn't reasonable. I can easily see how without the unspoken context/backstory that it could be interpreted that way. And under that interpretation, I agree with you both 100%.

I'm just saying it's like hearing the punchline without the set up.

Imagine, for instance, a group watching the first scenes of Saving Private Ryan where a soldier picks up his own dismembered arm and someone in the audience says [British accent]"It's just a flesh wound"[/British accent]. It would be perfectly reasonable for those who had seen The Holy Grail and those who hadn't to reach wildly different interpretations of that comment.

My confusion, Yu-Ain, and Barbara's, is that neither one of us understands what warning a man not to be fooled by good looks has to do with a man cheating on his wife?

Because it has nothing to do with a man cheating on his wife, but rather with *our* assumption that "She's beautiful. How can a man not be happy?" as if having a beautiful wife was all that's needed to be happy.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 3, 2009 04:29 PM

It only seems to make sense if you assume that Tiger Woods cheated b/c all his wife had to offer was her looks.

Well, the joke is meant to attack the reasoning that the only reason he *shouldn't* have cheated was because his wife *was* offering her looks.

And as you've already pointed out, there are far better reasons for him to have kept it in his pants than that.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at December 3, 2009 05:12 PM

You mean, you mean that there IS more to being happily married than having a beautiful wife???:D

"My dear, I will be sober tomorrow morning, but you will still be ugly" or something like that attibuted, to Winston Churchill.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Beauty can be much more than physical appearance (and physical appearance can be much less than beauty).

Tiger Woods is a highly paid (incredibly!) pro athlete, with a big ego.
Tiger Woods travels all over America (and sometimes, Pinky, the World!) playing his sport in front of thousands of adoring fans and not a few groupies.
Tiger Woods is a man (human being), fallible and susceptible to the weakness of the flesh, like all of us. Just he has more money and opportunity and ego to project himself on the willing and eager, if he chooses.

Does that make it right? No.
Who knows what his wife is really like to live with? Who cares?
Either he atones for his alleged guilt and they reconcile, or else they split up and she gets a wheelbarrow full of his money.
Sad really, when it all seems to boil down to "money" and "ego". This does not seem like the apex of modern civilization.

Men make jokes about it because it is "gallows" humor; that is, black humor. What man hasn't been tempted. Some give in to temptation, some walk away. Most average guys in part envy pro athletes, and in part loathe them for the way they comport themselves. I could give numerous examples of the loathsome ones out there.

Sometimes that sort of black humor is a compromise between the "fight or flight" reflex. Not angry or threatened or willing to fight, not willing to run away, but injecting something weidly humerous (sometimes) to deflect the situation or reduce the tension (sometimes).

Does this make any sense to anybody??? :)

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at December 4, 2009 12:23 AM

It makes a lot of sense, Don.

I think what tends to bug women is probably the same thing that guys get annoyed with when they complain about "players" getting laid so much: the idea that our personality is irrelevant - it doesn't buy us anything to be nice or smart or good people because the opposite sex is only interested in looks.

But guys in particular are more likely to give this impression because (as you all so often tell us, I have no idea with how much truth) to you a pretty woman is like a nice looking sports car: a thing to be acquired, and not a person. Pretty insulting when you stop and think about it.

I used to have a hard time understanding women who refuse to wear makeup or try to look their best. Obviously, given my stance on plastic surgery, I think that can be taken too far. But in addition to enjoying the pleased look in a man's eyes when I look good, I also enjoy looking good from an aesthetic standpoint, just as I try to make my house look good. I enjoy beauty - not that I am beautiful by any means, but I find beauty pleasing and therefore would rather look more pleasing than less.

But that's not the most important thing about me, and men so often talk and act as though looks are all that interest them in women. It's almost as though the rest of us is invisible.

I think character and intelligence matter. A lot. I have asked myself what I'd do and how I'd feel if my husband came back terribly disfigured. I imagine that would be hard for both of us. But it would be so much harder to lose someone whose company and mind I enjoy and admire, and whom I love. And my greatest fear has always been that something like that would happen and he would be too proud to stay with me, or think he was doing me some kind of favor by leaving me.

I think that's really the only scenario in which I've ever envisioned being left. Looks matter. But not so much as other things in life. Not as much as love or loyalty.

Posted by: Cassandra at December 4, 2009 05:50 AM

Does this make any sense to anybody???

Makes sense to *me*.

Which probably means you should be worried...

Posted by: BillT at December 4, 2009 08:21 AM

Like anything else, Cass, it's a stereotype. "Men just care about looks." Hey, it has a basis in reality, but it's not true. Or at least, it is every BIT as true as "Women just care about money." I'd say that neither statement is true (even when you simply set the 'absolute statements are never true' thing aside.

Women can be attracted to a guy with money (or nice car, or nice clothes, or nice things), but unless she's shallow, she won't marry that guy if he's a jerk. By the same token, a man can be attracted to a beautiful woman, but unless he's shallow, he won't marry her if she's a jerk.

Love and loyalty absolutely matter. Without getting TOO personal, I can divulge that my wife's illnesses, while not disfiguring by any stretch, have caused her to wonder if I was going to leave her. Not with cause mind you, I take my vows seriously, and I do recall 'in sickness and in health' in there. But it scared her nonetheless. But the fact remains, she couldn't help worrying about it.

Nor, I'm sure would a serviceman (or woman for that matter) who was disfigured in combat be completely free of worry about how his (or her) SO would react. It does my heart good to read stories like those you've posted, since it restores my faith in human nature. I am sure that it's not universal, but it's more common than our culture would lead you to expect.

Posted by: MikeD at December 4, 2009 12:25 PM

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

Are you sure about that? Cuz, I'd always heard it as: 'Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder'.

At least, I'm pretty sure that's the *beauty* MH sees, anyway.
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at December 4, 2009 12:39 PM

But that's not the most important thing about me, and men so often talk and act as though looks are all that interest them in women. It's almost as though the rest of us is invisible.

I sure have felt invisible for a long time. Even before I put on all that weight (which I am still in the process of losing). From where I sit, the fact that I am an intelligent, nice person doesn't matter, because the single/unattached men I've managed to come into contact with don't even seem to give me a chance to let them see that.

It was hard for me, dealing with the fact that my 10-year-junior sister was getting married, and to a man I would have considered a more appropriate age for me (I'm 6 months older than my BIL). A large portion of my social life since returning to Texas 5 years ago - until more recently - consisted of doing things with my sisters. Men don't look at the 30-something overweight "nice girl" when women that look like my sisters are around. I just thank God my best friend came down for the wedding (sans her husband) so she could keep me distracted from the fact I went stag, even though I had eleven months warning there would be a wedding.

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at December 4, 2009 09:44 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)